|
Well it's already Monday the 7th in the East. End of Sunday the 6th in the far West. Still no payment for the week ending July 1st? I think this is not a campaign that pays weekly. Personally, I find the longer and longer delays each week to be a larger and larger annoyance, if you know what I mean.
I'm now looking into other signature campaign options.
|
|
|
|
Whatever happened here. I'm kinda disappointed in Seattle that there's no bar where I can buy a beer with BTC yet. Seattle bars, please make my dream come true soon!
Hey, thanks for responding. I all but forgot about this thread. A few places did manage to get on board, including Fuel Sports Bar and Ada Technical Books (both serve alcohol). I am friends with Andrew from Liberty and we had plans to get them setup with it, as well as two bars owned by the same gal. She was on board until she read about all the goxing in the news. I brought this idea to the Seattle bitcoin meetup to get a street team going and trying to put together some places where this would make sense in, but I had a hard time. I haven't given up completely. I was talking with coinbase and wanted to hook up with their biz dev team, but to my knowledge, they don't have a Seattle rep yet. Tried a few other places and had some dialogue (Sun Liquor, Bottle Neck Lounge, etc.) but ultimately failed. I wanted to give some time for the price and public perception to recover before being 'that guy' trying to spread the bitcoin gospel. Hopefully coinbase and bitpay can bring on enough people in the mainstream that talking about it within the next 3-6 months with more bars wouldn't be an issue. We'll see. If you are in the Seattle area reading this, PM me, maybe we can use the SeattleBitcoin subreddit as a planning ground as well... Cool! Nice job on fuel and Ada's. I know both those spots pretty well. Definitely gonna make my dream come true at fuel then next time I'm down in pioneer square! |
|
|
|
|
At this point, we can say that the op isn't really correct about weekly payments. Payments seem to happen when xbtec gets around to it. Which looks pretty terrible on his business, in my opinion.
There needs to be some addressing of the payment schedule. Originally, the weeks were supposed to begin/end on Sundays...by that system, we are a week late now.
|
|
|
|
|
Fuel sports bar in pioneer square says they accept it too. Just confirmed it to me via email. Gonna head down for a pint (or two). Guess it'll have to be at least two because apparantly they say it's a 20$ minimum to pay in BTC (which is weird, but oh well).
|
|
|
|
|
Whatever happened here. I'm kinda disappointed in Seattle that there's no bar where I can buy a beer with BTC yet. Seattle bars, please make my dream come true soon!
|
|
|
|
|
我們可以與您肯定同情你的英語不是這麼好。但我們所有的同情並不能真正幫助我們理解你想說什麼。請你幫個忙，找朋友誰分享你的母語，請他們來幫助你製作你的反應。它似乎很清楚，我認為你是對的統計機器翻譯依靠100％，它的下降短。特別是如果你想爭辯或拋出的指責，那麼你要貴點的精妙之處碰到。如往年一樣，這是八九不離十像你鍵入單詞沙拉，這是一個羅夏測試來猜測你的意圖的語法/語義。為了方便說明，我想像著我的一段，是絕對荒謬的是由谷歌渲染成“傳統的中國人”。
Reverse translated:
We can certainly sympathize with you your English is not so good. But all our sympathy does not really help us understand what you mean. Do yourself a favor, find friends who share your native language, ask them to help you make your reaction. It seems clear, I think you are right to rely on statistical machine translation to 100%, it fell short. Especially if you want to argue or throw accusations, then you want your point of subtlety encounter. As in previous years, this is sorta like you type the word salad, which is a Rorschach test to guess your intentions syntax / semantics. For convenience of explanation, I imagine my period, it is absolutely absurd rendered by Google as "traditional Chinese people."
Original paragraph:
We can certainly sympathize with you about your English not being so good. But all our sympathy doesn't really help us understand what you're trying to say. Do yourself a favor, find a friend who shares your native language and ask them to help you craft your responses. It's seems clear to me that you're relying 100% on statistical machine translation and it's falling short. Especially if you want to argue or throw accusations, then you want the subtlety of your point to come across. As things stand, it's sorta like you're typing in word salad and it's a rorshach test to guess your intended syntax/semantics. Just for illustration, I'm imagining that my paragraph is absolute nonsense as rendered into "traditional chinese" by Google.
Edit:
Actualy the round trip to Chinese and back in Google isn't so bad. But this is obviously very language dependent. For example, I took the same paragraph to tamil and back and now it's starting to sound like prose by Floord-1
We will be sure your English is not so good, you can sympathize with. But our sympathy really help us understand what you're trying to say and what not. , Do yourself a favor and share in your own language, ask a friend to help you craft your answers. Statistical machine translation is 100% dependent on you for it and it seems clear to me that the short fall. You have to throw the charges or argue, in particular, should you come across subtle point. MP If you type the word salad, and it's your purpose syntax / semantics guess Rorshach appears in the film as a test, it's waiting. Just the description, I have to Google "traditional Chinese" will be a complete nonsense to imagine that my column.
|
|
|
|
|
sed has a good point, IMHO. There should be a known payday so that everyone can stay on track.
|
|
|
|
|
Is cheese wizards still the only retailer that accepts btc in Seattle? Has anyone heard of anywhere else? I can't believe we're into 2014 and I still can't get a beer with btc in Seattle.
Or maybe I just don't know where to look for later info. Let me know folks!
|
|
|
|
Thanks you Buziss, thread locked. |
|
|
|
...
The best way is to silence because the stupid knowledge and your funny (Spammers to raise Activity).
...
This thread is like a disco jam on repeat: Spammers to raise ActivityBoom-chick-boom-chick-boom-chick-boom-chick Spammers to raise ActivityBoom-chick-boom-chick-boom-chick-boom-chick Spammers to raise ActivityBoom-chick-boom-chick Spammers to raiseBoom-chick-boom-chick Spammers to raiseBoom-chick-boom-chick Spammers to raiseBoom-chick-boom-chick-boom-chick-boom-chick-boom-chick Spammers to raise ActivitySeriously, if you can't communicate in finite sentences, it starts to sound like nonsense-land real fast. I'd save your accusations for your native language. This is embarrassing. |
|
|
|
|
I see this message "changing avatars is not currently possible" in my profile section. I wonder what's up with this? I see many accounts with interesting avatars, why can't I change mine "currently"?
|
|
|
|
You are confused about what "expected profit" means.
I think you are slightly confused about what "expected profit means. Here's what everyone except you is talking about when they say 'expected profit': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_valueWhat are you talking about? I am talking about a 1 time run where your odds are 99% chance of winning. I have been saying that the entire time. I have already said countless times that over the course of time, you are going to lose money. But if you say, had a 20 bet limit, and you rolled 20 times, you have a 99.99% chance of gaining a very small amount of coins/money...etc It's a very weird casino game where you have a 99% chance of winning. I guess the win is <1% of the bet? What game is this? No, you would have a 50% chance of winning any given bet, or 49.5 for most house edge places. But Martingale works in the very short run. So I am saying you do a small amount of bets...and then quit... Ok, well if the game is a 50/50 game (or 49.5/50.5, similarly) then you're completely wrong about having a 99% chance of winning. I guess as typical in martingale you bet 1 unit to start, so you are going to bet 20 times, is that right? I think maybe your mistake is that you tried to consider that the probablility of losing all 20 bets is very low, is that right? But consider that you don't have to lose all 20 bets to come out negative. For fun, I generated a random series of 20 plays using python's bin(random.getrandombits(20)). Assume you start with 1000 units and that you start betting at 1 unit, first column is W/L, second column is the amount won/lost, third column is your balance. W +1 1001 W +1 1002 L -1 1001 L -2 999 L -4 995 L -8 987 L -16 971 L -32 939 L -64 875 L -128 747 L -256 491 L -512 -21 !!! you just went broke!!! W +1024 ... L -1 L -2 L -4 L -8 W +16 W +1 L -1 Ok, for fun assume you had 10,000 starting units instead of only 1000, then in that case, the simulation can continue: W +1 10001 W +1 10002 L -1 10001 L -2 9999 L -4 9995 L -8 9987 L -16 9971 L -32 9939 L -64 9875 L -128 9747 L -256 9491 L -512 8979 W +1024 10003 L -1 10002 L -2 10000 L -4 9996 L -8 9988 W +16 10004 W +1 10005 L -1 10004 So, in this single instance simulation, if you had 10000 units and you play martingale starting with 1 unit then you came out +4 units after 20 bets. However, I hope you see that that long string of negatives can just as easily happen towards the end of your 20 bets and then you come out negative. Also, I hope you see that you need a huge bankroll in order to support losses that double each time and not go broke. So I am guessing you missed tons of this conversation we had? Its okay I will review it for you. I don't mean an exact amount of hands. For example, if you wanted to just win 1 base unit, and you were rolling 5-20 times. Your odds are EXTREMELY high that you are going to win. It doesn't mean yeah I am just rolling 20 times...or x amount of times. It just means Martingale works in small doses, which GREATLY increase your odds. But the problem with Martingale is that you keep doing it, and odds are you are going to bust eventually. All I was saying is it works in extra small to small doses, and only once. I don't think I missed so much, but thanks for the recap. I think that my example shows very acutely how easy it is to go broke. In my example you'd either have to have quit on 1st or 2nd bet for a profit of 1 or 2, or you could quite later on one of the winning bets for again very small profits. But who walks into a betting game with 10,000 units and feels satisfied to walk away as a winner with only 2 units profit?! And this example shows how easy it is to bust unless you have a huge bankroll/base-bet ratio. |
|
|
|
Halo All!  This thread is maybe fun but I think it's important. I don't like trolls, like all of us. If thread is not self moderated, we're often forced to see trolls spaming bulls^it about everything. Often on that coin ABC is shit, won't go anywhere; ABC = scam, sell coins, dev =s^it, coin = s^it etc. WITH NO REASON. Only to cause panic; to disturb and lie etc. making THRASH at forum. "SxC" is fukcing troll. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=231646Much of his post is pure hate stupid trolling. I know there's a "ignore" button, but I wonder if there's any chance to permanently BAN him for his disturbing this great forum  But permanent bans don't get rid of trolls, it just encourages them to create a new account and continue trolling. I think the ignore button and not responding to trollishness is the best solution long-term. |
|
|
|
|
Damn I love these puzzles, it's too bad I'm not smart enough to actually solve one. Still, seeing it go down makes me remember old sherlock holmes novels and other sorts of fun deductive fiction---that's why I love that this is real life! Thanks so much to the generous folks who sponsor these events.
|
|
|
|
DISCLAIMER : THESE CALCULATIONS ARE KINDA RANDOM ( But still better than all the "1"s so far)
Lets base Bitcoin's adoption on the number of forum users.
There are 7 billion people on earth , so 1 on your scale is one adopter and 100 is 7 billion adopters.
If we use a logarithmic scale of base 10, we could say:-
7 billion = 10^9.845
Now , we can say that currently , there are around 300,000 users on this forums. Assuming that they are the only people using Bitcoin :-
300,000 = 10^5.477
That means we would rank 5.477/9.845 = 55 on your scale.
All this assumes that we use a logarithmic scale , which I find appropriate as it is the scale we usually use when we compare BTC price since the beginning (again , this assumes price is directly proportional to number of adopters)
300000/7000000000 = 0.00004285714 0.00004285714*100% = 0.004285714% so 0.004285714 on his scale why would you assume a 1-100 scale is logarithmic? Funny, if the 1-100 scale were logarithically interpreted, then I'd say 1. Otherwise I think we're probably still less than 1. |
|
|
|
Now that bad news is gone with the auction. We can finally focus on good news such as this.
I agree that this is good news. However, I'm not sure that the auction was actually bad news. I mean, in some sense, it seemed to me to be a legitimization of bitcoin by the us gov't. A pragmatic one perhaps, but a validation nonetheless. |
|
|
|
I see "Alice" is reducing your capacity to think as well as my ability to write clearly Yes, Stunna changed it from 100 per week to 400 per month max. Alice is killing me indeed. Horrible puzzle, but so addictive. I will change it, thanks dude! EDIT: Done. What is this thing about "Alice"? I don't know what you guys are talking about. |
|
|
|
Floord-1 speaks in Haiku I guess  bluefirecorp: This is very likely to be illegal , almost definitely , but admins will not demand proof of legitimacy or ban him unless there is no possible scenario where his goods are legitimate. This makes sense too , and user privacy is never breached until completely necessary. I would suggest you leave our poetic friend some negative rep if you believe his actions are illegitimate. Don't expect any official action. I already said there's no possible scenario in which selling MSDN accounts is legal. I mean, unless he's Microsoft... but following that logic, I could sell hacked Paypal accounts and claim that I'm Paypal just selling old accounts or something. bluefirecorp: You did not read my post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=670590.msg7614946#msg7614946Reading your posts is a little like watching one of those movies by Salvadore Dali and Luis Bunjol. You know it probably means something, but it's not exactly clear... |
|
|
|
Pretty good especially considering the domain changes. Or do you think that has to do with it? I'm not sure how those rankings are calculated. |
|
|
|
1-0. Argentina is into quarter final. The Swiss almost equalized it in the last moment. Looks like Messi has his share behind all the goals Argentina made in this world cup.
The swiss player with that header that bounced back and hit his foot and went out is going to be dreaming of that moment for the rest of his life, I'm afraid. What a last few moments! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
